• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:#689]Homeowner screamed and fired a warning shot before ultimately killing home intruder, police report

Daddyo said:
How would an AR with a 100 round magazine **** up your house? You gonna miss 99 times? You have the option to fire only what's necessary to end the threat. That's hopefully 1 or 2 rounds at most.
Click to expand...
So there, you only need a small mag.
 
Bum said:
Once that door came open, the homeowner fired a warning shot first and then fired another shot which struck the suspect in the arm. The bullet proceeded on through his chest and he was pronounced dead on arrival.
Click to expand...

A person with a gun against an unarmed individual doesn't need to stand far back. In other words there's nothing stopping them from approaching the suspect and shooting at point blank range to ensure that the bullet wound would be non-fatal. Warning someone beforehand doesn't completely let the shooter off the hook in the same way that a thief warning their target of an impending crime doesn't let the thief off the hook.
 
Bum said:
A Tampa woman is facing a murder charge after a person she tried to lure into a robbery through a dating app shot and killed her (own) brother in self defense
Click to expand...

Nonsensical. Someone who commits robbery is by definition a robber and not a murderer. Had it been the other way round where the innocent person was killed then indeed she should be prosecuted as an accomplice to murder. If her brother assaulted the person then she'd be an accomplice to assault. Had her brother killed the person without her approval then there might be an argument that she'd be guilty of negligence. And so on.
 
watsup said:
What other mass murder means in the US are you speaking of?
Click to expand...
Suv......Christmas in Wisconsin.

Fire.... Billy ferry in Tampa killed 5
 
Michael McMahon said:
Nonsensical. Someone who commits robbery is by definition a robber and not a murderer.
Click to expand...
How do you know the intent of someone who has entered your home with you and your family present? Why would you given them the benefit of the doubt?
 
Citizen said:
You can't buy machine guns, SBRs, silencers
Click to expand...
[looks in gun safe]

Yes you can, and every time I've applied for the tax stamp using a Form 1 or Form 4 the government asks "why do you want this". I type in "for all lawful purposes" and lo and behold, a few months later a tax stamp arrives at my house or at the gun shop.
 
Michael McMahon said:
Nonsensical. Someone who commits robbery is by definition a robber and not a murderer. Had it been the other way round where the innocent person was killed then indeed she should be prosecuted as an accomplice to murder. If her brother assaulted the person then she'd be an accomplice to assault. Had her brother killed the person without her approval then there might be an argument that she'd be guilty of negligence. And so on.
Click to expand...
Accomplice Liability Law.
 
Rucker61 said:
How do you know the intent of someone who has entered your home with you and your family present?
Click to expand...

I think you misread the article. She's being charged with murder over the death of her accomplice. Yet it was the robbery victim that killed her brother. So she's being charged with murder over a minuscule connection. Should her brother be posthumuously charged with murder over his own death? If it's a fair trial then at most she could be charged with threatening behaviour in addition to the robbery charge.
 
Michael McMahon said:
I think you misread the article. She's being charged with murder over the death of her accomplice. Yet it was the robbery victim that killed her brother. So she's being charged with murder over a minuscule connection. Should her brother be posthumuously charged with murder over his own death? If it's a fair trial then at most she could be charged with threatening behaviour in addition to the robbery charge.
Click to expand...
Yes; she took part in a crime that resulted in the death of her co-conspirator; in many states this holds her responsible for the death of her co-conspirator under Felony Murder and accomplice Liability laws.
Google it.
 
Michael McMahon said:
She endangered her criminal brother to retaliatory violence. But under your right wing views endangering criminals isn't a crime.
Click to expand...
I am many things, but "right wing" isn't one of them, additionally, these are state laws , not my "views".
Don't let your emotions get the better of you.
 
watsup said:
Which weapon is most destructive in mass murders? You have to wonder how many people could have been saved if the perpetrator would have had to use a different weapon in those instances.
Click to expand...
I wonder how many could have been saved had the teacher in that classroom been armed and trained.

I wonder how many would have survived had police breached the room immediately. How many of those already shot bled to death in that 60 minute delay?

How many shots can a revolver shooter fire in an hour? How about a single shot shotgun? How about a muzzle loader?

Minimum 600 rounds with the revolver, 360 with the single shot, and 120 with the muzzle loader.

A hammer can deliver 62 blows per minute. That's 3720 hammer or tomahawk or machete strikes in an hour.

All far more than necessary to kill 19 kids.
 
Michael McMahon said:
Morality and legality isn't always the same.
Click to expand...
Who said they were?
This is not the thread for rabbit hole arguments....its for defensive gun uses; stick with the theme.
 
Bum said:
Don't let your emotions get the better of you
Click to expand...

If a criminal is wanted dead or alive and their accomplice incites a crime that ultimately leads to the death of that criminal, then should the accomplice be entitled to some of the cash reward? Reductio ad absurdum.

Bum said:
defensive gun uses; stick with the theme
Click to expand...
 
Lursa said:
What other details do you need? You just dont want to admit you're wrong.

Very very wrong. Reality is your friend. You even denied mine...straight from ABC News.
Click to expand...

My guess, these people know each other and this is about drugs. No "self defense " at play.
That is what most of this nonsense is, isn't it?

Yes, it is.
Daddyo said:
To avoid reloading. To defend your business against dozens of rioters. Cops did nothing in others states remember?
Click to expand...

Oh, come on. You want to murder 30 people and spend life in jail?

To save a handbag. 🤡
 
Bum said:
Who said they were?
This is not the thread for rabbit hole arguments....its for defensive gun uses; stick with the theme.
Click to expand...

Lol

You said defensive gun uses.

Lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom